Transcript
1
AD in an integrated farming environment
Dr Andrew Salter
Anaerobic Digestion and Biogas AssociationNational Exhibition Centre, 07 July 2010
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
AD 4 RD
• Integrated Systems for Farm Diversification into Energy Production by Anaerobic Digestion
• Rural Economy and Land Use (RELU)
• University of Southampton
– School of Civil Engineering & the Environment
–School of Biology
• University of Reading,
–Centre for Agricultural Strategy
• http://www.AD4RD.soton.ac.uk
2
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
• Research areas include:
–Policy and practice
– Social implications/perspectives
–Economics
–Environmental impacts
–Energy and GHG emissions
AD 4 RD
Crops for AD
3
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
• AD creates two products
–Biogas = energy
–Digestate = bio-fertiliser
• Can change the amounts/balance of both of these by changing the materials fed in to the digester
AD - feedstocks and outputs
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Crops for bio-fuel (energy) production
• for bio-diesel
– oilseed rape
– sunflower
– linseed
– soya
– Peanut
– Jatropha
• for bio-ethanol
– wheat
– sugar beet
– maize
– sugar cane
– lignocellulosic
material
• for biogas
– crops
– agricultural
wastes
– green waste
4
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Potential crops for biogas -
• Barley
• Cabbage
• Carrot
• Cauliflower
• Clover
• Elephant grass
• Flax
• Fodder beet
• Giant knotweed
• Hemp
• Horse bean
• Jerusalem artichoke
• Kale
• Lucerne
• Lupin
• Maize
• Marrow kale
• Meadow foxtail
• Miscanthus
• Mustard
• Nettle
• Oats
• Pea
• Potato
• Oilseed rape
• Reed canary grass
• Rhubarb
• Ryegrass
• Sorghum
• Sugar beet
• Triticale
• Turnip
• Verge cuttings
• Vetch
• Wheat
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Methane yields
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
Bar
ley
Cab
bag
e
Car
rot
Cau
liflo
we
r
Clo
ver
Co
cksf
oo
t
Co
mfr
ey
Ele
ph
ant
gras
s
Fab
a b
ean
fie
ld b
ean
s
Flax
Fod
de
r b
ee
t
Gra
ss
gras
s/cl
ove
r
He
mp
Jeru
sale
m …
Kal
e
Luce
rne
Lup
ine
Mai
ze
Mar
row
kal
e
Me
ado
w f
oxt
ail
Mis
can
thu
s
Mu
star
d
Ne
ttle
Oat
s
oils
ee
d r
ape
Po
tato
Re
d c
love
r
Re
ed
can
ary
gras
s
Rh
ub
arb
Rye
Rye
gra
ss
Sorg
hu
m
Sud
angr
ass
Suga
r b
ee
t
Sun
flo
we
r
Trit
ical
e
Ve
tch
Wh
eat
Wh
ite
cab
bag
e
catt
le m
anu
re
Pig
man
ure
Po
ult
ry m
anu
re
me
than
e y
ield
(m
3 C
H4
/ kg
VS
add
ed)
5
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
Wheat Triticale
me
than
e y
ield
m3/h
a
3-4 node
anthesis
milk ripe
dough ripe
mature
Effect of harvest date
Amon, T., Amon, B., Kryvoruchko, V., Machmüller, A., Hopfner-sixt, K., Bodiroza, V., Hrbek, R., Friedel, J., Pötsch, E., Wagentristl, H., Schreiner, M . & Zollitsch, W. (2007) Methane production through anaerobic digestion of various energy crops grown in
sustainable crop rotations. Bioresource Technology, 98, 3204-3212.
Environmental impacts
Dr Donna Clarke
6
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Aims
• Assess potential impacts on biodiversity of diversification into farm energy production through AD (i.e. dedicated energy crops)
• Develop conceptual model / framework to identify impacts for management & mitigation
Environmental & Ecological Impacts
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Environmental impact assessmentRISK SCORED ON Potential impact on invertebrates & weeds
Regulating Supporting
Management PracticePest Control Pollination Soil Formation Nutrient Cycling Primary Production
Cultivation
Tillage "tillage" +1.0 -1.0 -2 -2 -2
Inversion ploughing -3 -2 -3 -3 -2
Minimal tillage +1.5 +1.5 +1 +1 +2
Direct Drilling +1 ?+1 +1 +1 -1/+1
Cultivation Score
Crop Production
Nutrient input Mineral fertilizer -2 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5
Slurry / organic +1.5? +1 +2 +2 +1.5
Digestate ? ? ? ? ?
Production Score
Crop Protection
Weed control Mechanical -1 -2.0 -1.5 -1.5 -2
Herbicides -2 -3 -2 -2 -3
control Pesticides -2 -3 -2 -2 -3
fungicides ? ? Neg neg ?
Protection Score
Pre/Post Cropping
Stubble removed -2.5 -2.5 -2.0 -2.0 -3
Stubble retained +2.5 +2.5 +2.0 +2.0 +3
Incorporation ? ? +1.5 +1.5 +2
Spring sowing Pos Pos Pos pos +3
Winter sowing ? ? ? ? -3
Pre/Post Cropping Score
Other Management Practices
Intensive grassland - cutting (>1/yr) +0.5? -2.0 ? ? -2
- grazing (high intensity) -1.5 -1.5 ? ? -2
- fertiliser applications -2 -1.5? -2.5 -2.5 -3
Other Unimproved grassland Pos +2.5 Pos pos +3
Permanent grassland (>5 yrs) Pos neg? Pos pos +2
Switch from hay to silage +1 -2.5 Neg neg -2.5
Other Practices Score
OVERALL RISK SCORE
7
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Conventional Winter WheatRISK SCORED ON Potential impact on invertebrates & weeds
Regulating Supporting
Management PracticePest Control Pollination Soil Formation Nutrient Cycling Primary Production
Cultivation
Tillage "tillage" +1.0 -1.0 -2 -2 -2
Inversion ploughing -3 -2 -3 -3 -2
Minimal tillage +1.5 +1.5 +1 +1 +2
Direct Drilling +1 ?+1 +1 +1 -1/+1
Cultivation Score -3 -2 -3 -3 -2
Crop Production
Nutrient input Mineral fertilizer -2 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5
Slurry / organic +1.5? +1 +2 +2 +1.5
Digestate ? ? ? ? ?
Production Score -2 -2 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5
Crop Protection
Weed control Mechanical -1 -2.0 -1.5 -1.5 -2
Herbicides -2 -3 -2 -2 -3
control Pesticides -2 -3 -2 -2 -3
fungicides 0 0 Neg 0 0
Protection Score -4 -6 -4 -4 -6
Pre/Post Cropping
Stubble removed -2.5 -2.5 -2.0 -2.0 -3
Stubble retained +2.5 +2.5 +2.0 +2.0 +3
Incorporation ? ? +1.5 +1.5 +2
Pre/Post Cropping Score +2.5 +2.5 +2 +2 +3
Other Management Practices
Intensive grassland - cutting (>1/yr) +0.5? -2.0 ? ? -2
- grazing (high intensity) -1.5 -1.5 ? ? -2
- fertiliser applications -2 -1.5? -2.5 -2.5 -3
Other Unimproved grassland Pos +2.5 Pos pos +3
Permanent grassland (>5 yrs) Pos neg? Pos pos +2
Switch from hay to silage +1 -2.5 Neg neg -2.5
Other Practices Score
OVERALL RISK SCORE -6.5 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Organic grasslandRISK SCORED ON Potential impact on invertebrates & weeds
Regulating Supporting
Management PracticePest Control Pollination Soil Formation Nutrient Cycling Primary Production
Cultivation
Tillage "tillage" +1.0 -1.0 -2 -2 -2
Inversion ploughing -3 -2 -3 -3 -2
Minimal tillage +1.5 +1.5 +1 +1 +2
Direct Drilling +1 ?+1 +1 +1 -1/+1
Cultivation Score
Crop Production
Nutrient input Mineral fertilizer -2 -2.0 -2.5 -2.5 -2.5
Slurry / organic +1.5 +1 +2 +2 +1.5
Digestate ? ? ? ? ?
Production Score +1.5 1 +2 +2 +1.5
Crop Protection
Weed control Mechanical -1 -2.0 -1.5 -1.5 -2
Herbicides -2 -3 -2 -2 -3
control Pesticides -2 -3 -2 -2 -3
fungicides ? ? Neg neg ?
Protection Score
Pre/Post Cropping
Stubble removed -2.5 -2.5 -2.0 -2.0 -3
Stubble retained +2.5 +2.5 +2.0 +2.0 +3
Incorporation ? ? +1.5 +1.5 +2
Pre/Post Cropping Score
Other Management Practices
Intensive grassland - cutting (>1/yr) +0.5? -2.0 -1 0 -2
- grazing (high intensity) -1.5 -1.5 ? ? -2
- fertiliser applications -2 -1.5? -2.5 -2.5 -3
Other Unimproved grassland Pos +2.5 Pos pos +3
Permanent grassland (>5 yrs) +1 -1 +1 +1 +2
Switch from hay to silage +1 -2.5 Neg neg -2.5
Other Practices Score +1.5 -3 0 +1 0
OVERALL RISK SCORE +3 -2 +2 +3 +1.5
8
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Environmental impact scores
Regulating Supporting
Pest
ControlPollination
Soil
Formation
Nutrient
Cycling
Primary
Production
Winter Wheat (conventional) -6.5 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5
Oilseed rape (conventional) -6.5 -6.5 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5
Maize -6.5 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5 -7.5
Grass (3 cut silage) -3.5 -3.5 -2.5 -2.5 -5
SpringWheat (conventional) -4 -6 -6.5 -6.5 -5.5
Winter Wheat (organic) +1 +1.5 +1 +1 +2.5
Grass (organic) +2 -1 +2 +2 -0.5
Economics
Philip Jones
9
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
• Optimise net margin for whole farm
– Linear programming
– Compare inputs, outputs and costs for a range of farm enterprises
• Example
– Cereal farm model
– Based on East of England
– Farm size 312 ha (average of FBS)
Economic potentials
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
• Based on 2009 prices
Reference scenario
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
he
ctar
es
10
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Introducing AD
0
20
40
60
80
100
120h
ec
tare
s
Scenario 1 - AD: max farm net margin
Feedstock
Food
Reference run Scenario 1 Percentage
(kg) (kg) change
Nitrogen (N) 39,796 18,387 -53.8
Potassi um (k) 24,185 9,768 -59.6
Phosphorous (P) 15,467 9,359 -39.5
nutrient imports
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Changing the electricity value
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
he
cta
res
Scenario 3a - AD at 50% Feed-in tariff
Feedstock
Food
11
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Imported feedstock
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Scenario 4 - imported maize
Feedstock
Food
Scenario 1
(kg)
Scenario 4 (importation
of feedstocks) (kg)
Percentage
change
Nitrogen (N) 18,387 0 -100
Potassium (k) 9,768 0 -100
Phosphorous (P) 9,359 3104 -68.2
Reducing farm GHGs
12
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
• Arable farms
–Mineral fertilisers
–Diesel fuel use
• Dairy farms
–Manure management
–Mineral fertilisers
–Diesel fuel use
Sources of GHGs
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
GHG emissions - arable
-700
-600
-500
-400
-300
-200
-100
0
100
200
300
cereals with
grass
with
grass
(AD)
sugar
beet
(AD
leaves)
sugar
beet
(AD all)
maize SB with
food
waste
GH
G e
mis
sio
n/s
av
ing t
CO
2e
q
CHP
sprays
fertiliser
fuel
13
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
GHG emissions - dairy
-1400
-1200
-1000
-800
-600
-400
-200
0
200
av farm +AD 100%
housed + AD
no cows + food
waste
+ food
waste (2)
GH
G e
mis
sio
ns
(t C
O2
eq
)
overall emissions
emissions saved from landfill
mineral fertiliser
diesel usage
saving from generated electricity
imported electricity
An integrated approach
14
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
• Can combine food and energy production.
– Utilise break crops for energy and environment
• Reduce mineral fertiliser use with digestate and legume crops
– legume (clover) before wheat to capture nitrogen, can be digested and used as feedstock
• Use crop residues as a resource for energy production and then nutrients
Integrated farming approach
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
Farm integration
clover
digester
grass
tops
slurry
oilseed rape
seed
nitrogenosr press
cake
feed
grain
wheatbeet
sugar beet
digestate
CHP
bio-
diesel
plant
dairy unit
bio-diesel
energy
milk & beef
15
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
An integrated example
Dr. Andrew SalterADBA, NEC, 2010
• Many different crops can be used as feedstock depending on the circumstances
– Grass - multiple harvest dates
– Whole crop cereals – earlier than Maize and range of possible harvest dates
– Headlands and margins
– Rotation systems
• Alternative cropping systems help to maximise yield and minimise use of artificial fertiliser
– Reduce costs
– Reduce GHG emissions
Conclusions
16
Thank you
This research is funded by UK Research Councils under the Rural Economy and Land Use Programme (RELU)
More information can be found at:
http://www.AD4RD.soton.ac.uk
http://www.cropgen.soton.ac.uk
top related